The End for which God created the world (J Edwards): Intro

So... here's my paraphrase of Edwards' sermon - 'the end for which God created the world'.  What better place to start than the 'intro' (Containing explanations of terms and general positions)

Basically, he's  going on about 'ends' (i.e. where we're aiming to get to)

So you have to get:

• Subordinate end - if you are aiming to get somewhere, there are 'mini-ends' within your aim, these are subordinate ends.
  
• Ultimate end - where we are aiming to get (where the subordinate ends take us to)
  
• Cheif end - where we are ultimately aiming (completely+utterly, the last place we want to get - where the ultimate ends take us)
  

So, a man goes on a journey to see the taj mahal... he gets there and he has acheived his 'ultimate end', going through many other 'subordinate ends' to get there (getting on a plane, eating, etc).  What you don't yet realise is that the ultimate end is not actually the ultimate end... he is only going there to research for his book.  His ultimate end therefore, will be writing his book.  Or will it... is he not writing the book to get more money!?  So is his ultimate end money!?  Ah well, you see my point (or Edwards') - subordinate ends are ends which enable ultimate ends... only the ULTIMATE end (as in the thing that we are ultimately, nothing else better or more important than, like) would be called the chief end.

This is a bit simpler than Edwards', but I'm not sure I quite catch everything he says... but it will do for now.

Here's where he starts to complicate it all... he adds 9 'extra bits of information' to help us get the complexities of this idea of 'ends' - eek!

1. "A subordinate end is never valued (as a chief end) above its own ultimate end" (p128)

2. "A subordinate end may be equally valued with an ultimate end if it is necessary to the ultimate end" (p129) - things get a little bit more complex when we stop thinking of things as a 'straight line' argument... it's more of a 'mesh' of 'ends' - so you can have a subordinate end, and an ultimate end that are of parallel importance... but a subordinate end can never trump a/the chief end.

3. "Where there is only one ultimate end, it is chief above all other ends" (p130)

4. "What we seek for its own sake is our "last" or "ultimate" end" (p131) - so, what do you seek for its own sake? 

5. "There is only one ultimate end when one thing only is sought on its own account" (p131) - so in lots of areas, it may be that we have many parallel 'ultimate ends' at the same time... but when there is just one, that would point to us wanting that ultimately.  Skip to the chase... does God have one ultimate end for the world in creation - which is not subordinate to anything - it is ultimate!?  Edwards, here introduces another concept; that there are two types of 'ultimate end'.  There is the 'original' ultimate end - i.e. the one which God, before creation, had for creating the world.  There is also such a thing as a 'consequential' ultimate end - which may pop up as the 'original ultimate end' is being fulfilled.  So for example... as I strive to 'fit in with fashion', I may get married to fulfil my 'original ultimate end', but as I get married, I realise that family is great - I love my wife, and my kids, and that in itself (as a consequence of my trying to fulfil the 'original ultimate end') becomes an ultimate end - a 'consequential one'.  Edwards applies this concept to God - he may have had an original ultimate end for creating the world... but it couldn't have been 'his faithfulness to his promises' because he hadn't yet created anyone to be faithful to!  They are both ultimate ends, but one is original, and the other (to keep his promises) is consequential. 

6. "The one "original" ultimate end of all creation governs all God's works" (p134)

7. "In the "highest sense" of God's ultimate end in creation, this end is also the end of all his works of providence" (p134) - If God made the world for an ultimate (original) end, then all his works in the world (providence) MUST also be working towards that end.

8. "The ultimate end of providence in general is the ultimate end of creation" (p135) - we can only work out what God's ultimate end is, by his works in creation...

9. "There is only one ultimate end of creation if only one end is agreeable in itself" (p135)

So there we have the intro... God must have an original ultimate end (the cheif end)... it doesn't stop him having other subordinate, or even 'consequential' ultimate ends... it just means that there is somewhere one thing - only one, which is his cheif end... and I guess (the title is a slight give-away) that is the whole point of the sermon!

Let's move on to Chapter 1!

"Keep going" (chapter 1 - Should we expect to struggle with the Christian faith) Neil Martin

Really helpful book, it seems - deals with 2 questions:

1. What does the bible have to say about the place of struggles in Christian experience?

2. How can this biblical material be useed as a weapon to tackle some of the most common struggles?

I guess if these questions are answered well, it will live up to it's title, and help any Christian who struggles with these things (which I guess is all of us) to 'Keep going'!

So... Chapter 1 - Should we expect to struggle with the Christian faith?

Yes... they are normal (though undesirable)... six reasons!

1. Christians face difficult questions that can't always be answered

Difficult questions are normal!

Have a look at Psalm 73 - Asaph - Why do the wicked prosper?  He says, "12 Behold, these are the wicked; always at ease, they increase in riches. 13 All in vain have I kept my heart clean and washed my hands in innocence."  "This was an important question in Asaphs time, and is still today.  But the question wasn't only important.  It wasn't just 'interesting' or 'puzzling'.  It was difficult.  It was unsettling and disturbing--it threatened the foundation of his beliefs (v2)." (p4)

"It shouldn't surprise us, then, that we experience difficult questions in the Christian life.  Asaph was affected, and so are we; and that means we've got something to learn from his response.  You see Asaph didn't see his questions as a show-stopping obstacle to his trust in God.  Instead he set himself to seek deeper understanding.  He wasn't content to to live with irrational belief... Neither was he content to live with irrational disbelief... No, Asaph proceeded on the basis that neither belief nor disbelief should ever be irrational, and he launched himself into a quest for answers, leaning on God for help (v16-17)" (p5)

...but we won't always find the answers we're looking for!

"In Psalm 73... Asaph learned to see the prosperity of the wicked and the suffering of the righteous from God's perspective... But we mustn't conclude from this that we'll all get satisfying answers to every question we ask.  Some questions involve answers that lie partly (or totally) beyond the bounds of human understanding, and this... only intensifies the struggles they produce" (p5)

There would be a problem "If we discovered our beliefs were based on logical impossibilities or could conclusively be destroyed... But this isn't quite the situation we're up against here."

Think about it:  God is BIG!  Really BIG - eternal, all knowing, all powerful, always everywhere, he exists outside of time, and reigns high over all!  "It is self evident that many of the things we'd like to know about Him lie beyond the capacity of human understanding; if they didn't, we'd have to question whether we were dealing with God at all... in situations like this, rationality involves recognising the fact that there are certain things that we can't know, and in drawing conclusions only on the strength of the things we can." (p6)  

Think about physics, for example: "The fact that physicists recognise the limitations of their knowledge is one of the main things that makes their work rational!  They don't resort to irrational belief--ignoring evidence that contradicts existing theories.  Neither do they resort to irrational disbelief--asserting that they know all there is to know and that nothing beyond their intelligence actually exists.  The path of rationality, both in physics and in Christianity, lies in accepting the fact that certain things can't be known, and in restricting our conclusions to the things that can." (p7)

This is Job's big lesson!  "Job simply wasn't prepared to let go of the facts he could understand merely on the strength of questions about things he couldn't" (p8)

2. Christians' feelings don't always keep pace with their faith

We won't always feel sure that God cares for us

We can often convince ourselves that  'feelings ought to keep pace with faith', so the more I believe, the more I should feel like I believe.  If I believe I'm forgiven (for example), I should feel forgiven...

There are a couple of big problems with this... First, feelings naturally ebb and flow, and "if we use them as a test of our acceptability with God, we could reach a different conclusion every day of the week!" (p9)  Second, "Feelings aren't the test the bible uses.  The bible teaches us to look to Jesus righteousness as the measure of our acceptability, and it's reliance on him--even when it's a very desperate reliance that isn't accompanied by comforting feelings--that's real faith as the bible describes it" (p9)

Have a look at Ps130 - the psalmist (v1) cries to God from 'the depths' - that sounds pretty bad!  It could be that he is in physical danger, or undergoing illness, "but... neither really does justice to the context of the psalm.  The writer's preoccupation with sin ad his need for forgiveness in verses 2-4 shows us that the cause of his troubles was internal as opposed to external." (p10)  So what does he do?  Well (v3-6), he "preaches to himself--reminding himself of the facts that he knew about God, and about God's attitude to sin... he gathered up his moral debts in his mind and entrusted them to God's mercy." (p11)

And does he find relief?  Does he suddenly feel assurance?  No!  "He's left 'waiting' and 'hoping' (v4)-- trusting what God has said, but seemingly lacking any reassuring feelings about his own position.  The psalmist didn't stop relying on God's mercy, but neither did he feel assured that he'd actually benefited from it." (p11)  So... was he trusting God or not?  Well, look at v4 - "He may not have felt a great deal of confidence, but with or without confident feelings he still found that his trust led to 'fear of the LORD'.  And that 'fear of the LORD', of course, is just the bible's way of describing  the effect that real faith has on our lives." (p11)  What a great guy!  He "refused to look elsewhere because he knew that id God didn't forgive him, nothing else could." (p12)

Hang on though - is that normal?  Do many believers in the bible keep trusting despite 'feeling' like they are?!  Well, Martin takes us to Hebrews11 - where many people may take us to show that we should 'feel' like we are where we're at... He explains that "as the context makes plain, what the writer has in mind here isn't so much a feeling of certainty or sureness, as a willingness to treat the things we believe as certain or sure.  Faith is an inner determination to rely on the thing in which that faith is placed.  It's a matter of trusting in the merits of Jesus alone--nothing more and nothing less.  And this, as we saw with the psalmist, is something we can do whether we experience confident feelings or not." (p12)

Look at these other two examples...

Joel2

Joel "calls the people of Israel to turn to God on the strength of what they know of him--his kindness and patience, and his readiness to forgive.  He calls them knowing that they're not yet able to feel confident about the outcome ('Who knows?' is as far as they're able to get by feeling) but Joel clearly doesn't think that this will stop real faith from acting." (p13)

Isaiah50

"Even believers who walk in darkness--which clearly isn't a description of people who are enjoying great feelings of confidence--can still fear, obey and rely on God." (p13)

He concludes this section: "Feelings of confidence are a great blessing in the Christian life and some of us will be fortunate enough to enjoy them more or less constantly.  But we mustn't set up this kind of experience as a benchmark for genuine faith.  In scripture, saving faith makes its presence felt not only in feelings of confidence but also in desperate dependance on God when feelings are absent.  Faith that holds on dogedly to Christ, and trusts wholly in his merits for our acceptability, is pleasing to God whether we're personally assured of God's love and forgiveness or not.  It's still real faith, but it's faith that is particularly vulnerable to intellectual struggles." (p13)

...and the only context in which we can expect to feel sure is Christian practice

"Longing to feel sure about our faith is a good and natural thing [though!]  The question is how these longings can be satisfied.  The bible answers this question by encouraging us to look for the effect that faith has on our lives.  According to the bible, real faith always bears fruit in love for Jesus, and love for Jesus always bears fruit in obedience to his commands.  So the evidence of real faith in a Christian's life is Christian living; living in a manner that puts Jesus' commands into practice." (p14)

NB. "It plays no part in our acceptability to God--which is founded on Jesus' merits alone--it shows us that our faith in those merits is real." (p14)

1John

"John told his readers that Christian practice was the evidence they should look for if they wanted to be sure their faith was real and he concentrated his recommendations on two particular areas of Christian living--personal holiness[(1John2v4-6,v17)] and brotherly love[(1John2v9-11,1John3v10b-18)]". (p14)

So just to clarify, "Feelings of confidence can only be expected if we're really serious about living the Christian life.  John isn't suggesting that obedient living contributes to our acceptability before God--far from it!  He repeatedly tells us that acceptability with God is based on Jesus' merits alone.  Neither is he suggesting that the person who is diligent will be immune from struggles--Job's example in the previous chapter should be enough to disabuse us from that idea.  No, he simply teaches us that without diligence in Christian practice, we've got no right to expect Christian confidence." (p16)

3. Christians are sinners

4. Christians live in non-Christian societies

5. Christians are affected by their temperament and circumstances

6. Christians often forget to count their blessings

Tim Keller - the church is responsible for so much injustice

It's a hard question - If God is so good, why is it that 'the church' and injustice often seem to walk hand in hand? Are we not meant to fight injustice? As Keller points out, “We have to address the behavior of Christians--individual and corporate--that has undermined the plausibility of Christianity for so many people. Three issues stand out. First, there is the issue of Christians’ glaring character flaws. If Christianity is the truth, why are so many non-Christians living better lives than the Christians? Second, there is the issue of war and violence. If Christianity is the truth, why has the institutional church supported war, injustice and violence over the years? Third, there is the issue of fanaticism. Even if Christian teaching has much to offer, why would we want to be together with so many smug, self-righteous, dangerous fanatics?” (p52)  

Christians’ Character Flaws 

“If Christianity is all it claims to be, shouldn’t Christians on the whole be much better people than everyone else? This assumption is based on a mistaken belief concerning what Christianity actually teaches about himself” (p53)  

1. Common grace - “God gives out good gifts of wisdom, talent, beauty, and skill “graciously”--that is, in a completely unmerited way. He casts them across all humanity regardless of religious conviction, race, gender, or any other attribute to enrich, brighten, and preserve the world.” (p53) 
   
2. Christians are sinners - “Christian theology also speaks of the seriously flawed character of real Christians. A central message of the Bible is that we can only have a relationship with God by sheer grace.” (53) - not our moral efforts, but through Jesus’ death. “the mistaken belief that a person must “clean up” his or her own life in order to merit God’s presence is not Christianity. This means, though, that the church will be filled with immature and broken people who still have a long way to go emotionally, morally, and spiritually... The church is a hospital for sinners, not a museum for saints.” (53-4) 
   
3. Broken lives - “It is often the case that people whose lives have been harder and who are “lover on the character scale” are more likely to recognize their need for God and turn to Christianity. So we should expect that many Christians’ lives would not compare well the the nonreligious (just as the health of people in the hospital is comparatively worse than people visiting museums)” (p54)  
   

Religion and violence

“Religion “transcendentalizes” ordinary cultural differences so that parties feel that they are in a cosmic battle between good and evil.” (p55) It has therefore seemed like the issue (Japanese empire - Buddhism and Shintoism, Terrorism - Islam; Hindu’s v Christians and Muslims). However, not all violence is caused by religion. “The communist Russian, Chinese, and Cambodian regimes of the twentieth century rejected all organized religion and belief in God. A forerunner of all these was the French Revolution, which rejected traditional religion for human reason. These societies were all rational and secular, yet each produced massive violence against its own people without the influence of religion. Why? Alister McGrath points out that when the idea of God is gone, a society will “transcendentalize” something else, some other concept, in order to appear morally and spiritually superior. The Marxists made the state into such an absolute, while the Nazis did it to race and blood.” (p55) “Societies that have rid themselves of all religion have been just as oppressive as those steeped in it. We can only conclude that there is some violent impulse so deeply rooted in the human heart that it expresses itself regardless of what the beliefs of a particular society might be--whether socialist of capitalist, whether religious or irreligious, whether individualistic or hierarchical. Ultimately, then, the fact of violence and warfare in a society is no necessary refutation of the prevailing beliefs of that society.” (p56)  

Fanaticism

Many people try to understand Christians along a spectrum from “nominalism” at one end to “fanaticism” on the other. A nominal Christian is someone who is Christian in name only, who does not practise it and perhaps barely believes it. A fanatic is someone who is thought to over-believe and over-practise Christianity.” (p56-7) “The problem with that approach is that it assumes that the Christian faith is basically a form of moral improvement.” (‘middle xn’ = someone who believes it but is not too devoted! So lives a kind of moral life... but not too hardcore!) (p57)  

“What if, however, the essence of Christianity is salvation by grace, salvation not because of what we do but because of what Christ has done for us? Belief that you are accepted by sheer grace is profoundly humbling. The people who are fanatics, then, are so not because they are too committed to the gospel but because they’re not committed to it enough. Think of the people you consider fanatical.. They’re overbearing, self-righteous, opinionated, insensitive, and harsh. Why? It’s not because they are too Christian but because they are not Christian enough. They are fanatically zealous and courageous, but they are not fanatically humble, sensitive, loving, empathetic, forgiving, or understanding--as Christ was. Because they think of Christianity as a self-improvement programme they emulate the Jesus of the whips in the temple, but not the Jesus who said, “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone” (John 8:7). What strikes us as an overly fanatical is actually a failure to be fully committed to Christ and his gospel.”  

A Biblical Critique of Religion 

In his teaching, Jesus continually says to the respectable and upright, “the tax collectors and the prostitutes enter the kingdom before you” (Matthew 21:31). He continually condemns in white hot language their legalism, self-righteousness, bigotry, and love of wealth and power (...Luke 11:39-46; 20:47)” (p58). Also have a look at Isaiah 58:2-7 (the prophets’ condemnation of religion!). “The tendency of religious people... is to use spiritual and ethical observance as a lever to gain power over others and over God, appeasing him through ritual and good works.” (p59) - (to gain power?) “The God of Jesus and the prophets, however, saves completely by grace. He cannot be manipulated by religious and moral performance--he can only be reached through repentance through the giving up of power.” (p59-60).  

So... “i do good” leads naturally to “I can tell others what to do” where “God has dome good to me” leads naturally to “I need to be good to others”  

“The BIble teaches us that our treatment of ...[the poor] equals our treatment of God” (p60)  

So... the Christian church is unjust... should we abandon it? NO! We need to move to a better understanding of the Christian faith... GRACE! “The answer is not to abandon the Christian faith, because that would leave us with neither the standards nor the resources to make correction. Instead we should move to a fuller and deeper grasp of what Christianity is.” (p62)  

Justice in Jesus’ name: 

Slavery 

Racism 

Aparthied 

Catholics v Communism  

“When people have done injustice in the name of Christ they are not being true to the spirit of the one who himself died as a victim of injustice and who called for the forgiveness of his enemies. When people give their lives to liberate others as Jesus did, they are realizing... true Christianity”. (p67)

The Enemy Within (Lundgaard): (1) 'evil-at-my-elbow'

A friend of mine challenged me to read this book - it's based on John Owen's work on sin.  I guess you could go further than that really - Kris Lundgaard explains how he, "...kidnapped Owen by force.  [He]took him as [his] co-author, and together [they've] written a new book.  [Owen] brought to the table his precious exposition, outlines, arguments, and illustrations, and [Lundgaard] returned to him stories of bone-marrow transplants and torx sockets, and tried to bring his profound understanding of the Bible into our world."  So far, it has been an awesome blessing to read - what a challenge to fix my eyes on the king, and run the race set before me.  

I'm writing because it helps to put down my thoughts, on no level am I offering a critique - I've never read Owen (yet), I hope it is helpful.

So... Chapter 1 - 'sin is at my elbow'

Sin is so obvious in our lives... well it is in Lundgaard's (and mine) - when we randomly do stuff which just doesn't honour God, and it seems to happen without us thinking - 'naturally?'  In Romans 7, Paul talks about this concept.  As Lundgaard puts it, "He helps me understand my madness and gives me some juicy theological terms for it: "the law of sin" (v23), "this body of death" (v24), "my sinful nature ("my flesh" in many translations, v18), "sin living in me" (v17), just plain "sin" (v11), and the law of sin and death" (8:2).  Theologians like to call it "indwelling sin."  Whatever we call it, it's an enemy of God and of our souls." (p22)

We want, like Paul, to reach our goal, to honour Jesus with our lives - to finish the race, to "receive the crown of righteousness (2 Timothy 4:7-8)" (p23).  And as he Lundgaard puts it, "The first step to fighting this enemy is to know it--and to know it well" (p22), this, he says, is why he wrote this book.  

Have a look at Rom 7v21 again, "So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand".  From here, Lundgaard helpfully brings out four truths about sin that helped Paul in his fight against it.  

1.  "Sin living in us is a "law"." (p23)  What kind of law?  Just like the 'law' of gravity - it is a law because it WILL happen, not the kind of law that someone passes and we have to obey.  Like hunger or thirst, or "fear...  [it] impels is to fulfill its demands, and... brings a force to bear on us to bow into its submission" (p24)  This is helpful in beginning to answer the question "in what sense has Christ defeated din in the believer?... [Lundgaard explains that] he has over-thrown its rule, weakened its power, and even killed its root so that it cannot bear the fruit of  eternal death in a believer.  Still... sin is sin; its nature and purpose remain unchanged; its force and success still grab us by the throat." (p24)

2.  "We find this law inside us" (p24)  This isn't an external law - the law is inside us.  Lundgaard describes it as the difference between a lecture on the effects of AIDS, and being told by the doctor that you are HIV positive.  He comments that "few people have come to terms with the law of sin.  If more people had, we would hear more complains of it in prayers, see more struggling against it, and find less of its fruit in the world.  When we find this law in us, Paul's "Who shall deliver me?" echoes down our bones." (p25)  Only believers realize this law of sin working in them... unbelievers "have surrendered themselves to it and are borne along by it.  A believer on the other hand, swims upstream--he meets sin head-on and strains under its strength." (p25)

3.  "We find this law when we're at our best" (p25)  "Paul found it at work in him even whole he wanted to do good... he was aware of it even when he most wanted to serve God, when he set his mind to obey his Savior and King, when Christ ruled his heart."

4.  "This law never rests" (p26)  A believer wants to do good, because 'grace rules his heart' - Jesus is King of his heart!  That might be generally, in the whole of life.  It may also be specifically - he may have "some specific duty in mind that he wants to perform" (p26).  "When the believer sets his jaw to even the simplest duty to God, sin fights him right at that point ("Evil is right there with me"--v21), making his drowsy or distracted when he would pray, or stingy and ambitious when he would tithe."  Have a look at Galatians 5v17!

So What?

"To understand these four truths about indwelling sin is to arm yourself against it.  In your struggle against sin, there is only one thing more important to grasp than these four facts: the free, justifying grace of God in Christ's blood" (p27)  "Getting to know indwelling sin, as humiliating and discouraging as it can be, is our wisdom--if we have any interest at all in finding out what pleases the Lord (Ephesians 5v10) and avoiding everything that grieves the Holy Spirit (Ephesians 4v30)." (p27)

Notes on 'Doug Wilson: Future Men' #2

OK... so I want my son to grow up in godliness - to be a godly man (and I know that I can only do this by trusting God - in effect, I can only bring him up rightly with God on board!) - Wilson helpfully points out that "before rearing a son to be "masculine," it is... important to have some notion of what it is." (p13) And that is what he goes on to describe in the next chapter (chapter 1 - 'The Shape of Masculinity').

Wilson explains (with the help of some useful quotes by Douglas Jones, and Bill Mouser) that there are "distinctive features of the masculine constitution." (p13) They pick out 5 Characteristics, (which Wilson points out are by no means watertight - some of them may merge, while at times some 'manly characteristics' may not fit neatly into them) - "lords, husbandmen, saviours, sages and glory-bearers" (p14). Wilson points out that he will not "make a detailed case for these roles but will outline and describe the features of each and then show how each one should manifest itself in the life of boys." (p14)

So...

Lords: Gen1v26-8 - "Man was created to exercise dominion in the earth..." (p14) As the "result of the goodness and grace of God... the mandate is given to us yet again in another form in the Great Commission. We are told there to disciple the nations and bring them to true submission to the Lord Jesus Christ. (Mt. 28: 18-20)" (p14) How does this apply to our boys?? We see it in that "boys want to conquer and subdue..." (p14) - whether that is their 'back yard'... or whatever. We need to discipline our boys to use that 'want' rightly. "The point of discipline with boys is to channel and direct their energy into an obedient response to the cultural mandate" (p14) - we don't want to 'squash' but to teach! "Boys... should be in training to become men who exercise dominion, they should be learning to be Lord's of the earth, they should learn to be adventurous and visionary" (p14-15)

Husbandmen: Yes - man is supposed to 'exercise dominion'... but "the dominion mandate, taken in isolation, could result in men trying to build a culture based on piracy and freebooting... [it is because of this, therefore, that] men are created to conquer and subdue, and after this, to settle down." (p15) As blokes... we should not just build mega things - stiving to take on the world - we also need to build houses, raise sons, grow crops, earn money... "Boys therefore should be patient and hard-working." (p15)

Saviours: Wilson points out that "Men... have a deep desire to deliver or save" (p15)It is Jesus who is ultinmately saviour - 'the dragon slayer' - He defeats satan, and saves us from the wrath that we deserve! "Men who follow Jesus Christ, the dragon-slayer, must themselves become lesser dragon slayers" (p16)... Wilson therefore argues that it is "absolutely essential for boys to play with wooden swords and plastic guns". For we will be part of the great battle in heaven (Rev) and "to beat the spears into pruning hooks prematurely, before the war is over, will leave you fighting the dragon with a pruning hook... Boys must learn that they are growing up to fight in a great war, and they must consequently learn, as boys, to be strong, sacrificial, courageous, and good." (p16) (CONTRAVERSIAL! All these themes are discussed again later in the book)

Sages: A Sage is "a man who is great in wisdom" (p16) Wisdom is learned... ("Proverbs (1-9)... wisdom is a woman who disciplines boys") If a boy listens to, and learns wisdom... then "he grows up to a certain level of wisdom... when a man has grown up to wisdom, he has become a sage." (p16) Wisdom is an important characteristic for godliness. "We must therefore teach our boys the masculinity of study, of learning, of books, of intellectual discussion." (p16) It will probably be hard for boys growing up to see the importance of study... they will want to be outside playing football, or in the lounge playing video games, but the "connections [to life and goliness] must be made for [them]. Boys must therefore learn to be teachable, studious, and thoughtful." (p17) (is the whole 'girls are more academic' craze actually just because boys are not disciplined in study... or taught to appreciate the relationship between study and real life??)

Glory-bearers: 1Cor11v7, v3; Eph5v23-24 - man is the glory of God, woman is the glory of man. (EEK!! THAT IS SO 'UN-P.C.' in this day and age!!) Men and women are different - Wilson has made this point all along... and he makes it really clear in this chapter that "when the Bible assigns one kind of glory to man and another kind of glory to woman... they are different kinds and levels of glory." (p17) It most certainly does not imply that one is better, but only that they are different. Wilson concludes that "because these things are true, boys must be instructed on how to grow up into glory and how to fulfil their responsiblity to be representative, responsible, and holy." (p17)


He sums up well... "we should want our boys to be agressive and adventurous. They are learning to be lords of the earth. We should want them to be patient and hardworking. They are learning husbandry. We should want them to hate evil and to have a deep desire to fight it. They are learning what a weapon feels like in ther hands. We should want boys to be eager to learn from the wise. They are learning to become wise themselves. We should want them to stand before God, in the worship of God, with head uncovered. They are the image and glory of God." (p18)


So... we should be teaching boys to be:

Lords: To do this, they need to be "adventurous and visionary" (p15) N.B Not 'Lording it over', but leading... being 'active' not 'passive'. They need to be excited about their role/mission in life - to be the lords of creation under 'the Lord of creation'. This includes their mission in telling the gospel - their mission in being blokes, in honouring God with their lives, and helping others to do the same.

Husbandmen: To do this, they need to be "patient and hard-working." (p15) I have been struck by so many truths in this book - the way Wilson points out so many of the traits I bear. I want to learn how to be a godly man, and I want to teach my sons to do the same. He points out that if our mandate was merely 'be lords of the earth', then blokes would be going around having amazing adventures, blowing things up to see what was inside. They would be fighting over who could build the biggest bridge over the Thames, or who could design the best website, or they'd be piecing together major strategic plans for how they were going to evangelise the entire continent of South America in a year - and they would be doing this FOR THE WHOLE OF THEIR LIVES. Blokes should be full of big ideas... visions for the future! But they are also called to be 'husbandmen' - and that brings us back down to earth with a bump! As well being visionary, and adventurous... men need to be patient and hardworking! They need to raise a godly family, support them. and teach them about the Lord Jesus Christ. They need to hold down a job, to pay for their kids' schooling, to teach their family the Bible, to keep food on the table... as well as being 'lord of the earth' they need to settle down and love their families.

Saviours: Boys need to be "strong, sacrificial, courageous, and good." (p16) They need to be like Jesus! They need to learn to follow their king... our king is a saving king... and he is mighty in battle! Wilson's next chapter describes the problems of 'effeminacy' - Jesus is the saviour of the world - the king who slays the dragon! He's not a 'girly-boy' - he doesn't play with dolls and wear pink! He fights with swords AND WINS! He is mighty in Battle! If we are teaching our boys to be like Him, then surely we need to teach them to play with swords, and to fight like Him. They need to be "Strong... courageous..." (p16) - but they need to use it in the right way! For king Jesus!! Like our king, they also need to be sacrificial, and good - they need to use their strength to build up the church! Let us then teach our boys to be "strong, sacrificial, courageous, and good." (p16)

Sages: Boys must also be "teachable, studious, and thoughtful." (p17) It is 'manly' to be wise - but it doesn't come naturally... so let's discipline rightly, so that our boys learn to love study, and think things through. This applies first and foremost to the Word of God... but we learn how to do it in our schoolwork! Let's teach them those principles... teach them to love to study... and love to study God's word! To be "teachable, studious, and thoughtful." (p17)

Glory-bearers: Finally, "boys must be instructed on how to grow up into glory and how to fulfil their responsiblity to be representative, responsible, and holy." (p17) We are 'the glory of God' (1Cor11) - we represent him, people should look at blokes, and be pointed to Jesus - the one true bloke! But that is a high calling! Man - I am Christ's representative on earth!? MAN - I have a long way to go! It means though, that blokes need to be responsible and holy. These things don't come naturally! But it is by God's grace that we learn to live rightly for Him, and honour Him - bringing Him glory through the way we live our lives!

Notes on 'Doug Wilson: Future Men' #1

As I've read this book, I've been challenged and encouraged... I hope my 'ponderings' on Wilson's work are helpful to anyone who reads them :)

In his 'intro', wilson firstly points out that "our boys are future men" (p9) - that could be scary! He then explains that we can (basically) have two reactions to boys growing up... 1) Faith. 2) Unbelief. Wilson points out that "Unbelief squashes' faith teaches" (p10). How parents 'bring up' their boys is crucial - they need to do it in faith - looking to their potential in Christ Jesus. They need to encourage the good rather than just seeing the bad - they need to 'look past the sin', and see the godliness that is there!

"So faith is central in bringing up boys, but it is important to remember that the object of faith is not the boy. It is faith in God, faith in His promises, faith in His wisdom. Faith concerns the boy, and the boy and the boy can see that it concerns him. Parents are to believe God for their sons, which is a very different thing than believing their sons." (p11) Only God can make this boy a man of God! It is only by faith in Christ that he will reach any sort of potential at all! It is for this reason, that parents are to have faith in God 'concerning' their sons.

Wilson does make a good point... in that "it is very easy for us to ask God to give us "faith" to accomplish whatever it is we think is a good idea. But this is not what we are called to do." (p11)... we have to trust and rely on God to work through His word! We want to use the patterns of scripture, and look to the promises of scripture - we want to teach our sons to be godly - to be men of God, men of 'the word'. Men who are 'like Jesus Christ'!

"God is the one who places a specific boy in a particularhome. And He does so in order that those parents who believe and obey him might come to delight in a wise son, a son who is like Jesus Christ." (p12)


That all makes sense to me... If I have a son, I want him to grow up to be a man after God's own heart... I want him to be steeped in the scriptures, to know God, to trust in Christ. I want him to be like Jesus Christ - to be a godly man... and so I need to trust God for any sons that I might have - only He can make them 'godly'. I need to teach them God's word, I need to encourage godliness - to teach them and build them up to know and love the Lord Jesus. I need not to just 'squash' them by seeing only their sinfulness. I pray that, should God ever give me the oportunity, I would honour Him by doing this, in order that I "...might come to delight in a wise son, a son who is like Jesus Christ." (p12)

'...putting the 'OY' back in Boy' #1 (Foundations for Biblical Manhood)

Has our culture lost 'what it means to be a man'?

'How to mow the Lawn' says so...


(... notes on) 'Foundations for Biblical Manhood'


Biblical men?? Why would we want to be Biblical men??

1. Bible is really clear that the reason behind the fall... was that Adam was an 'un-biblical' man, the result of that denial of manhood = the fall.
2. Bible is (also) really clear that the GOSPEL is the solution to the fall! The Bible calls us to act in line with the gospel - if we don't do that, we have no reason to think that 'our whole word' won't fall apart.
3. And we see that happening don't we?? - divorce rate, sexuality issues, no nuclear family, pornography etc. - not just outside the church either - inside too. We therefore need to do something - for the sake of our marriages, families, and relationships!
   
   

What does our culture say about the whole situation??

1. EITHER says that, men and women are NO DIFFERENT (except for sexual organs) - might look down on a woman for quitting her job to raise a family, or be 'against' chivalrous behaviour by men.
2. OR, makes caricatures of men and women, and says that 'this is how men should be'...

BOTH will be an influence on our thinking - but #2 is probably the most influential!

Who are our cultural role models?

• 'James Bond' - driven, successful, dependable, strong, leader of men... BUT completely misogynous - hates, uses and abuses women, no emotions, complete individual - relies on noone - does what he has to do to get what he wants/needs.
  
  
• 'Tony + Gary (Men behaving badly)' - funny, banter, friendship... BUT want to do as little as they possibly can with their lives. (Drink, eat, sleep, play station A LOT)... low(ish) view of women. Nuts mag slogan, "women... don't expect any help on a Wednesday".
  
  
• 'FHM man' - takes good care of his body, disciplined, successful, makes the most of who he can be... BUT vain in extreme (most of the time primming and preening), obsessed with sex, being a spectacular lover... mainly superficial relationships - based on looks alone, reflection of a materially wealthy culture.

The Bible represents a good/healthy view of masculinity 'like this...'

Genesis 1-3 ...men are defined by their relationship to women...

Will look at 'creation principles'... might disagree on application, but these principles are timeless, as relevant today as they were when God wrote them down through Moses (like a piece of Blackpool Rock - the words go right the way through).

Genesis1v26-27

1st of 2 accounts of creation of mankind (here, mankind as a whole - male and female). In creation, God put 'male and female' right at the heart of His plan ('sex differences' not an afterthought...). There is no sense that MAN was at the heart of humanity - male and female! Similarly, no sense that woman is either (unlike what the DaVinci Code etc. seem to suggest)

• v27 - image of God: Should be ruling creation TOGETHER ...
• v28 - 'have babies': Should be filling the earth TOGETHER...

We are in the image of God in a similar way that 'our children' will be in 'our image' - whether male or female. We are also 'equal in the eyes of God' - equally important, and loved. Straight away, rules out all 3 'worldly culture' treatments of women - they degrage them and reduce them to objects of sexual pleasure - wrong to abuse women (pornography, promiscuity, misogyny etc.) We've mucked up - if you look at our culture, it just doesn't fit the bill - it doesn't even come close to making God's standard. It is great to know therefore, that these things will start to get fixed 'in Christ' (while on earth for Christians, but ultimately in heaven), we are being renewed in the image of our creator - made to be more like Jesus! Our general approach to the opposite sex should be that they are 'in the image of God', and partners in the task that God has set us!


Genesis2v18-25

The second creation account... sheds light on how men and women are 'equal' but 'different'. It is in reality, the account of 'the first marriage'... but we also learn a lot about 'male and female' here.

The principles laid down here about 'men' are 'inherent to who we are as men'. So... it makes sense to focus on the male role from Gen2.

The text is screaming out to us that... man is made as the head - the leader (Piper talks about the man's differing roles all involving 'leading, providing for, and protecting'). How is it that Gen makes this so clear??

• Well, it is through the eyes of the NT writers, that we should rightly understand Genesis, in the light of Christ. So...1 Tim2v13 - Paul explains that because 'man was created first', men are in a position of authority. (Just like in a football team, the one at the top of the list is the captain)
  
  
• Genesis makes it clear that Adam is the one who names Eve - First as 'woman', then as 'Eve'... the person given the right to name you is the one in authority over you (e.g. parents - they are the ones who have authority to name their children - not family friends etc..... e.g.2. In I.T. or Art, you create something, you get the right to name it) In Gen, God makes/names everything (Gen1v5+8)... but in Gen2, He gives that authority to the man... that is significant - Adam in authority etc.
  
  
• v21 - the woman is made from man. NOT man from woman... Paul uses this exact argument in 1Cor11v8 - he takes that and looks at it in relation to headship over woman - authority in church etc. Woman from man, therefore, man in authority over woman.
  
  
• Woman is made for the man (as 'helper' Gen2) Don't mishear - NOT to 'clear up after the man/be a servant...' woman is created to help man in the ruling of creation... N.B. She is made to help him with that - not visa versa. In 1Cor11, this is the warrant for man bein the head of woman - they are put alongside to help them to do the job he's been given. That is why in Gen3, the buck stops with Adam, not Eve - he is meant to be leading in the situation, but he is just passive!

Biblical conclusions?? Man was created for 'Leadership/Authority'

The way that works out changes by context (age/stage/etc.), but all should still be 'piper-ish' (leading, providing for, protecting), and probably includes things like:

• ability to make a decision
• takes hit when it goes wrong
• dependability
• 'buck stops with me'

Here we begin to see how wrong the 'Men behaving badly' model is - abdication the role God has given us! It doesn't mean we should always be leading upfront... can be taking a lead in prayer, in loving, staying quiet, in stepping back... but men should be active, not passive - the one who is LOOKING TO TAKE THE LEAD!


The Fall is when it all went wrong!

The Fall (Gen3v6) is when Adam abdicates headship - and it all goes wrong.

1. Where is Adam? WITH EVE... he knows everything that is said - he is right there!
2. What should he be doing? Stepping in/stopping her - "don't do it Eve"!
   
3. What does he do? He is a complete wimp - he stands by and lets her do it (Passive, not active)!!

Authority structure...

• Instead of: 1.God, 2.Adam, 3.Eve, 4.Creation
• It was:1.Creation (Snake), 2.Eve, 3.Adam, 4.God

This is most clearly condemned in the curse (3v17) - explicitly condemned for abdicating as the head! (Adam wasn't a biblical man). For the woman - your desire shall be for your husband (like Cain's desire for sin - sin crouching at the door... waiting for you... but you must rule over it - sin wants to rule Cain, like woman wants to rule man) The fall resulted in: Man's tendency to abdicate his authority, and woman's tendency to grab it - to manipulate... there is therefore a constant friction.

The minute of relationship breakdown, is the minute men followed in Adam's sin. SIN is written right through who we are... so... what can we do about it??


The only solution is THROUGH THE GOSPEL - with the help of the Holy Spirit, to get back to our rightful job!

Let's remind ourselves of the blueprint: Men and women are equal in dignity and love, and man given authority over woman.

How should that headship work out? IN LOVE!! - can be quite ungodly of men are just trying to 'have authority'.

How can we do it right then? Let's look at the example of Christ - to make sure we do!

Ephesians5 - HEADSHIP and LOVE are the same thing! Headship works its way out in love... at least, that's how it does in Christ. He is the head - how does that work out? He dies for us!! Want to be a godly guy?? How do we express our headship/leadership in LOVE?? How doe I help girls grow in godliness?? Godly leadership - loving, pointing to godliness, purity etc. wanting the church to grow in number and godliness.

Notes on... "Man and Woman in Christ" #1

Here are some comments on Clark's introduction... it's a kind of 'why I wrote this book' bit really...

The book looks at the difference in 'social roles' of men and women, and he explains that, "if there was any issue that gave rise to the ideas in this book, it was the issue of raising children. What are we to say to children about the fact that they are boys and girls? How are we to teach them to relate to their maleness and their femaleness?" (p. x) I have to admit that I have been asking the very same question.

"I am a man"... What exactly does that mean? - what is 'a man'? And more to the point, what is a 'godly man', a 'man of God' - how do I be a 'man after God's own heart' like David was? What does that look like in this culture - in 21st century Britain? How do I be a 'godly man', a 'man after God's own heart' in this 21st century British culture?

To understand that, surely I have to understand '21st century British culture' - this diverse culture, whose most recent developments have included things like, 'the rise of feminism', 'the acceptance of homosexual relationships', and 'a new definition of tolerance'. It is clear that many positive developments have been made, in many areas, but I have to agree with Clark, who (when analysing American culture in the late 20th Century) explains that "...some important human realities are increasingly being neglected, and ...the Christian people will suffer as a result" (p. x). It is clear that the same is happening in our culture.

It is right that we rethink the place of men and women in our society, that we rethink our cultural taboos, and re-address issues which have been 'ignored' for many years. But we have to do this whilst being under the Word of God. We have to sit under scripture and listen to what God says about the roles of men and women, before applying that to our own culture! As Clark explains, "The first and most important question in considering the roles of men and women is whether the Lord has said or taught anything about them and, if so, how Christians should respond to his word" (p. xi).

Clark explains that those who just 'dismiss' what the bible says about gender differences (without trying to interpret it, and apply it to our own culture), are in effect saying, that "they are free to make their own decisions without the guidance of Christian revelation in an area that is central to the way human beings are formed." (p. xi)

In his book, Clark aims to 'dig deeper' into these issues - it is, "a book on social roles for men and women" (p. x). He explains clearly 'where he is coming from' - as well as being a Bible-based, Christ-centred Christian, he is a 'complementarian' - arguing that, "the roles of men and women are complementary and ... one cannot be understood without the other" (p. xi).

He explains that, "seeing men-women differences in the perspective of social roles makes a major difference in understanding the past and the present" (p. x). 'Social roles' is an issue, lets not ignore it! As times move on, and we do things differently, let's not just 'scrap' the old way of doing things... let's instead, see why they were done, and if it is necessary to 'scrap' them, let's replace them with something else - making sure that the job they did continues to be done in a different way!

'a bit of Joel' #3

Well... we’re not quite onto Joel Chapter 3 yet… still the end of Chapter2 … but it is (in my opinion at least) the most exciting bit of the book!

So... we've seen how Israel were God's chosen people - they were God's people in God's place, under God's rule... as a result, they had a great relationship with Him, and prospered in the Land that God gave them. But then in Joel 1+2, that all seems to have gone wrong - God sends a plague of locusts to wreck their land... and that shows that Israel's relationship with them is wrecked...

In response, He tells them to 'wake up', to 'sober up', and to turn back to Him... and they do... they "rend [their] hearts and not [their] garments" (2v13) They turn wholeheartedly back to Him to live with him as their king!! Awesomely... God forgives them... He fixes their relationship with Him, and fixes the land to show that! What an awesome God we serve!!


So what's next??

Then God tells them that there is a 'future' element to this blessing too!! Not only does he fix their relationship with Him, and fix the land NOW, but in the future this blessing will only get bigger and better!!

How so?? He says at the end of Ch2... "And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh; your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, and your young men shall see visions. Even on the male and female servants in those days I will pour out my Spirit. And I will show wonders in the heavens and on the earth, blood and fire and columns of smoke. The sun shall be turned to darkness, and the moon to blood, before the great and awesome day of the LORD comes. And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved. For in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be those who escape, as the LORD has said, and among the survivors shall be those whom the LORD calls." (v28-32)

A new time will come... where all of God's people have his Spirit, not just prophets like Joel! A new time... when "everyone who calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved. " But there will still be a 'Day of the Lord' (when God "will show wonders in the heavens and on the earth, blood and fire and columns of smoke. The sun shall be turned to darkness, and the moon to blood, before the great and awesome day of the LORD comes"...). Amazingly though, it is on this 'Day of the Lord' that people will be saved - "those whom the LORD calls"!! What a 'new time' that will be!!


Acts makes it really clear that that 'new time ' is brought by Jesus!

I've had the awesome privilege of being able to study the book of Acts, and then explain it to a group of students quite recently. It's an awesome book!

It starts with Jesus, before He ascends up to heaven, explaining to His disciples that they "will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon [them], and [they] will be [His] witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth." (Acts1v8) That is a '4 part promise'...

• Firstly, the Holy Spirit will come.
• Secondly, they will be His witnesses in Jerusalem.
• Thirdly, they will be His witnesses in all Judea and Samaria.
• Lastly, they will be His witnesses to the end of the earth.

After He explains this, He ascends up to heaven... and a replacement for Judas is chosen (1v12-26). Now we have the 'New Israel' - the 'New 12' - the 12 apostles... going out to be His witnesses... and that is the background to the events about to unravel in Chapter2!

In Acts 2, Peter quotes from Joel 2v28-32, and explains that this is talking about Jesus.… He explains that this is the 'new time' that God promised in Joel... this is the 'new time' where whoever calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved! You can see it is a 'new time' because you've got a whole 'New Israel' with the apostles going out!

Acts 2 is so awesome... it shows the start of Jesus' promises in Acts1v8 being fulfilled - the Holy Spirit comes (Acts2v1-4)... and the gospel starts to go out from 'Jerusalem' to 'the ends of the earth' (Acts2v5-41)... THIS IS THE 'NEW TIME'!! It's awesome to see that as the people trust in Jesus... they are brought back into a right relationship with God (... God's people, in God's place, under God's rule - Acts2v42-47)

We are still in the time that Jesus brought!

Jesus brings the ‘new time’ when anyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved! He brings the ‘New Israel’ – the ‘new way’ to be right with God! Jesus is they way for our S.I.N. to be dealt with – He takes the consequences of our sin when He dies on the cross in our place… and shows that His plan definitely worked when He rose again from the dead! And guys… we’re still in that ‘new time’ now – this is still the time before the Day of the Lord, when we can call on the name of the Lord and be saved! So let’s do that! Let’s call on the name of Jesus Christ, and be saved!